Is It True

[mutley]

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register

anyway this topic is about the bwra not the nnwrf

 

[S. Rodgers]

Secondly if all voting that day has been declared null and void, does this also apply to votes regarding the ban of Di & Bruce Bellwood? :unsure:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I don't think it was fair to ban Bruce & Di from the BWRA, the wrong doings of Di concerned the NNWRF

G & H Fletcher :ran

I agree with what Geoff has said over the Bruce and Di situation with the BWRA

I went to the meeting on the 16 Dec at Highgate it was decided it would go to a postal vote

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

oh john r u are rep then sue

 

[mutley]

this ones off topic too

 

[Tony Taylor]

this ones off topic too

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

but it's helping me keep up with the BWRA U-turns

1st Bellwoods are banned by (unconstitutional) vote at AGM,

then they're banned subject to a postal vote that appears to me to be rigged to give a majority for a life ban,

then it's not proposals year and none of the votes count anyway ( why didn't the committee mention this at the AGM ????? )

I know its been Christmas and New Year and alcohol damages your brain and all that but I'm getting rather dizzy with all these turnarounds.

 

[rob67]

If there are any comments from the meeting on the 17th dec then it should come from a rep from the BWRA that has the right and the authority to do so. I'm sure we all know snippets of what went on at the meeting, but none that hold any truth unless specified by someone who has the authority of the BWRA to say so.

As far as Bruce and Di being banned from the BWRA, if it should go to a postal vote............as it is reputed to be so, then I hope the BWRA sort it out in time for racing not to be once again marred by the indiscretions and theft of money by two people who don't deserve the opportunity to cause more mayhem. Neither do those people who either support them or have a problem with them.

Let's just get it sorted and race. I don't have a problem with the way I voted at the BWRA meeting which was to ban Bruce and Di, stealing is stealing...............but whatever the final decision i hope it isn't directed by people who have other issues in mind and want to cause mischief.

chris

 

[mutley]

totally agree geoff bruce and di should never have been banned from the bwra and in my opinion the ban from the federation should never have been that long anyway if at all. about time somebody spoke some sense,and we start putting the fun back into our sport ,instead of dragging it down

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

[/quot

how would you speak sencible about it all then jeff please tell :blink: it wasnt really such a big deal then is that what you mean :blink: and if you wouldnt of banned them at all then what would you of done the members dicided it remember not just the committee

 

[mutley]

well said chris :thumbsup: how hard do people think it was for the fed committee especialy my wife we were also freinds not just working together fff this anyway ive had enough

 

[toadfish]

For the record i proposed that di and bruce were banned for a much shorter time

at both meetings.

My problems arise that at the bwra AGM decisions were proposed and agreed upon by bwra members. These were accepted by the committee as valid at no time did they say that these would not be accepted.I was unaware of the meeting in december so could not inform my rep just how strongly i felt.

There were lots of decisions made that day i would like to now what is happing to them. :rant:

GRAHAM

 

[rodders]

Agree with Chris :thumbsup: but its hard not to have an opinion,even without a representative from the BWRA telling us the full facts of the reps meeting.

As I see it,but i'm sure i'll be corrected if i'm wrong All the voting that took place(because of proposals) at the AGM should all now be null and void,because as already said on here,wait for it........NO PROPOSALS IN 2007 :lol: On a more serious note,what a waste of time Karen

 

[rob67]

For the record i proposed that di and bruce were banned for a much shorter time at both meetings.

My problems arise that at the bwra AGM decisions were proposed and agreed upon by bwra members. These were accepted by the committee as valid at no time did they say that these would not be accepted.I was unaware of the meeting in december so could not inform my rep just how strongly i felt.

There were lots of decisions made that day i would like to now what is happing to them. :rant:

GRAHAM

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Me too toady (w00t) Maybe we should contact our regional reps and ask them what is happening and when we might be likely to hear. What's the point of going to an AGM if decisions are overturned willy nilly :- " :blink: Whether in the constitution or not to accept proposals, no-one on the day was able to stop AOB and that is part of any meeting. For me I just hope they send a postal vote out ASAP and be done with it. Although it might be anybodys guess as to how long those decisions might stand

chris

 

[GRAHAM PEM]

this ones off topic too

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

but it's helping me keep up with the BWRA U-turns

1st Bellwoods are banned by (unconstitutional) vote at AGM,

then they're banned subject to a postal vote that's rigged to give a majority for a life ban,

then it's not proposals year and none of the votes count anyway ( why didn't the committee mention this at the AGM ????? )

I know its been Christmas and New Year and alcohol damages your brain and all that but I'm getting rather dizzy with all these turnarounds.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

CALM DOWN TONY YOU SHOULD BE USED TO THIS BY NOW. :thumbsup:

 

[rob67]

totally agree geoff bruce and di should never have been banned from the bwra and in my opinion the ban from the federation should never have been that long anyway if at all. about time somebody spoke some sense,and we start putting the fun back into our sport ,instead of dragging it down

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

[/quot

For ffff's sake they stole a considerable amount of money from a constitutional bound association, I was outside Matalan today, when a bloke was nicked for stealing a fluffy bloody hat!!! Fun can only be brought back into BWRA and FED if memebers believe they are being protected from illegal activity and being ripped off by alleged friends. This topic isnt about the FED it's about the BWRA being transparent, in their own time ( but for flips sake hurry up) and getting back to having fun as you say without being taken for a ride ( and not in an expensive caravan (w00t) )

 

[johnnoble]

I was at the meeting on the 16th dec .

I also agree that Bruce & Die should not have been banned from the B.W.R.A.

The meeting got a bit heated on this issue. [ 1 certain region were adamant that they should be banned] they made the most noise. So it was decided to have a postal vote. The Scottish region had sent a letter in saying the ban was far to harsh. I think when the postal vote is decided this ban will be overturned.

THE MAJORITY ALWAYS WINS IN THE END.

As for the drug testing, this should never have been voted on at the A.G.M.

[This rule has to be kept in for 2 years till the next proposal meeting]

 

[rob67]

I was at the meeting on the 16th dec .I also agree that Bruce & Die should not have been banned from the B.W.R.A.

The meeting got a bit heated on this issue. [ 1 certain region were adamant that they should be banned] they made the most noise. So it was decided to have a postal vote. The Scottish region had sent a letter in saying the ban was far to harsh. I think when the postal vote is decided this ban will be overturned.

THE MAJORITY ALWAYS WINS IN THE END.

As for the drug testing, this should never have been voted on at the A.G.M.

[This rule has to be kept in for 2 years till the next proposal meeting]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I think it's a dangerous assumption to make that one persons versions of events from one meeting is a true version of what might have happened. Dangerous also to give snippets of what 'might have been' and that if one region got the most heated and made the most noise................so what, unless it went against personal views..................which I'm sure were'nt taken into account as it was a reps meeting, not individuals. I'm not so sure John that the majority view you have in mind is the one that really exists, maybe the more newcomers to racing the less old time alliances might play a part. Hopefully we will see in a true democratic postal vote.

As for drug testing, if you dont give your dogs anything illegal then what is the problem as long as it is done in line with the appropriate guidelines. Why would people be scared of the truth being shown.

chris and rob

 

[rodders]

Well said Chris and Rob :thumbsup: Karen

 

[gary farmer]

I was at the meeting on the 16th dec .I also agree that Bruce & Die should not have been banned from the B.W.R.A.

The meeting got a bit heated on this issue. [ 1 certain region were adamant that they should be banned] they made the most noise. So it was decided to have a postal vote. The Scottish region had sent a letter in saying the ban was far to harsh. I think when the postal vote is decided this ban will be overturned.

THE MAJORITY ALWAYS WINS IN THE END.

As for the drug testing, this should never have been voted on at the A.G.M.

[This rule has to be kept in for 2 years till the next proposal meeting]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

YOU HAVE MY SUPPORT THERE JOHN BUT I MIGHT BE BIAS

IM NOT SAYING WHAT THEY DONE WAS OK

BUT LIFE IS A BLOODY LONG TIME.

I SAY GIVE THEM A SECOND CHANCE TO PUT THINGS RIGHT

GARY :thumbsup:

 

[Paws123]

Hi all
Is it true that there was a bwra meeting on the 17 december.

If so can anybody give me any information on what happened as i understand from the topgun site various decisions taken at the AGM seam to have been overtured some may be going out to postal vote eg DRUG TESTING.

If this is so what is the point of attending the AGM.  :angry:

Please can sombody help.

Graham

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

What does it say in the bwra topgun site

 

[GRAHAM PEM]

I was at the meeting on the 16th dec .I also agree that Bruce & Die should not have been banned from the B.W.R.A.

The meeting got a bit heated on this issue. [ 1 certain region were adamant that they should be banned] they made the most noise. So it was decided to have a postal vote. The Scottish region had sent a letter in saying the ban was far to harsh. I think when the postal vote is decided this ban will be overturned.

THE MAJORITY ALWAYS WINS IN THE END.

As for the drug testing, this should never have been voted on at the A.G.M.

[This rule has to be kept in for 2 years till the next proposal meeting]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

YOU HAVE MY SUPPORT THERE JOHN BUT I MIGHT BE BIAS

IM NOT SAYING WHAT THEY DONE WAS OK

BUT LIFE IS A BLOODY LONG TIME.

I SAY GIVE THEM A SECOND CHANCE TO PUT THINGS RIGHT

GARY :thumbsup:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

SORRY GARY I HONESTLY THINK THEY WERE GIVEN A POSITION OFF TRUST AND LET EVERONE DOWN FREINDSHIP IS FREINDSHIP BUT STEALING FROM MEMBERS AND FREINDS IS NOT IN MY MIND ACCEPTABLE JUST MY OPINION THO.

 

[tarragon]

http://www.topgunwhippetforum.co.uk/

 

[toadfish]

Hi all
Is it true that there was a bwra meeting on the 17 december.

If so can anybody give me any information on what happened as i understand from the topgun site various decisions taken at the AGM seam to have been overtured some may be going out to postal vote eg DRUG TESTING.

If this is so what is the point of attending the AGM.  :angry:

Please can sombody help.

Graham

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

What does it say in the bwra topgun site

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

basically some one was asking the same question as above

graham

ps topgun site is down at moment maybe to many hits (w00t) (w00t) (w00t)